Hyperspectral image classification and dimensionality reduction: an orthogonal subspace projection approach

Most applications of hyperspectral imagery require processing techniques which achieve two fundamental goals: 1) detect and classify the constituent materials for each pixel in the scene; 2) reduce the data volume/dimensionality, without loss of critical information, so that it can be processed efficiently and assimilated by a human analyst. The authors describe a technique which simultaneously reduces the data dimensionality, suppresses undesired or interfering spectral signatures, and detects the presence of a spectral signature of interest. The basic concept is to project each pixel vector onto a subspace which is orthogonal to the undesired signatures. This operation is an optimal interference suppression process in the least squares sense. Once the interfering signatures have been nulled, projecting the residual onto the signature of interest maximizes the signal-to-noise ratio and results in a single component image that represents a classification for the signature of interest. The orthogonal subspace projection (OSP) operator can be extended to k-signatures of interest, thus reducing the dimensionality of k and classifying the hyperspectral image simultaneously. The approach is applicable to both spectrally pure as well as mixed pixels. >

[1]  B. Holben,et al.  Linear mixing model applied to coarse spatial resolution data from multispectral satellite sensors , 1993 .

[2]  E. B. Ekren,et al.  Geologic map of the Lunar Crater quadrangle, Nye County, Nevada , 1969 .

[3]  E. B. Ekren,et al.  Geologic map of the Lunar Crater quadrangle, Nye County, Nevada , 1969 .

[4]  Paul E. Johnson,et al.  Quantitative determination of mineral types and abundances from reflectance spectra using principal components analysis , 1985 .

[5]  A. Goetz,et al.  Terrestrial imaging spectroscopy , 1988 .

[6]  Yosio Edemir Shimabukuro,et al.  The least-squares mixing models to generate fraction images derived from remote sensing multispectral data , 1991, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[7]  John B. Adams,et al.  Quantitative subpixel spectral detection of targets in multispectral images. [terrestrial and planetary surfaces] , 1992 .

[8]  Gene H. Golub,et al.  Matrix computations , 1983 .

[9]  Philip H. Swain,et al.  Remote Sensing: The Quantitative Approach , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[10]  Simon Haykin,et al.  Advances in spectrum analysis and array processing (vol. III) , 1995 .

[11]  James B. Farison,et al.  Spatially invariant image sequences , 1992, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[12]  H. Vincent Poor,et al.  An Introduction to Signal Detection and Estimation , 1994, Springer Texts in Electrical Engineering.

[13]  J. B. Lee,et al.  Enhancement of high spectral resolution remote-sensing data by a noise-adjusted principal components transform , 1990 .

[14]  Alfredo Huete,et al.  Separation of soil-plant spectral mixture by factor analysis , 1986 .

[15]  P. Switzer,et al.  A transformation for ordering multispectral data in terms of image quality with implications for noise removal , 1988 .

[16]  William H. Farrand,et al.  Visible and near infrared reflectance of tuff rings and tuff cones. , 1991 .

[17]  Paul E. Johnson,et al.  Spectral mixture modeling: A new analysis of rock and soil types at the Viking Lander 1 Site , 1986 .

[18]  N. J. Trask,et al.  Geology of the Lunar Crater volcanic field, Nye County, Nevada , 1971 .

[19]  A. Mazer,et al.  Image processing software for imaging spectrometry data analysis , 1988 .

[20]  S. Haykin,et al.  Adaptive Filter Theory , 1986 .

[21]  J. Boardman,et al.  Discrimination among semi-arid landscape endmembers using the Spectral Angle Mapper (SAM) algorithm , 1992 .